Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2003 ND 151 - In Re ZCB

In Re ZCB’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
January 2015
most recently cited

1 district · 8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Berkemer v. McCarty · Pennsylvania v. Mimms · Stansbury v. California · Pennsylvania v. Bruder

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a party is entitled to representation by legal counsel at custodial, post-petition, and informal adjustment stages of proceedings under this chapter. . . . Counsel must be provided for a child not represented by the child's parent, guardian, or custodian at custodial, post-petition, and informal adjustment stages of proceedings under this chapter.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “is to inform the parent or guardian why a minor is in custody and to allow the parent or guardian to be involved in the minor's decision whether to consent to take a chemical test.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “upon the files, records, and minutes or transcript of the evidence of the juvenile court, giving appreciable weight to the findings of the juvenile court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. In Re Hk

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.